Buying guide

Hoka vs Brooks: A Podiatrist Compares the Measured Numbers

One spec sheet survives lab measurement, the other does not. A foot and ankle surgeon on drop, stack, toe box and which brand suits which foot.

The short answer

Hoka and Brooks are not really competing on cushioning. They are competing on shape. Hoka builds a tall, rockered midsole that carries you over the front of the foot. Brooks builds a more conventional platform with a higher heel-to-toe drop and lets your foot do the bending. If you have a stiff, painful big toe joint, forefoot pain that flares when you push off, or a fused ankle, the rocker is doing real mechanical work for you. If you want to feel the ground, prefer a firmer heel, or have been thrown around by a tall midsole before, the conventional platform is the safer buy.

Brand loyalty is the worst way to choose between them. Both companies make neutral shoes, both make stability shoes, and both make something wide enough for most feet. What differs is the geometry of the individual model — and, as the numbers below show, how closely that model matches its own spec sheet.

What the lab numbers actually say

We have independent laboratory measurements for eight HOKA and seven Brooks models we review. Here is one flagship from each: the HOKA Bondi 9 and the Brooks Ghost 17. Reading them side by side is more informative than any amount of marketing copy.

Measurement	HOKA Bondi 9	Brooks Ghost 17
Drop, published	5 mm	10 mm
Drop, lab measured	9.1 mm	10.4 mm
Forefoot stack, published	38 mm	26.5 mm
Forefoot stack, lab measured	32.2 mm	25.8 mm
Heel stack, lab measured	41.3 mm	36.2 mm
Midsole softness	43.0 Asker C	36.2 Asker C
Toe box at the big toe	72.5 mm	69.6 mm
Widths	Regular to X-Wide	Narrow to X-Wide

Three things fall out of that table, and none of them are what the advertising would lead you to expect.

1. The Bondi is not a 5 mm drop shoe

HOKA publishes a 5 mm drop for the Bondi 9; the independent measurement cited here is 9.1 mm. That difference matters when matching a stated footwear preference, but it does not establish which shoe will reduce Achilles loading. Small heel-lift studies have produced reduced loading indicators and no reduction in overall modeled force under different conditions. Those results should not be treated as a direct clinical comparison of the Bondi and Ghost.

The forefoot figure is the bigger problem. Published at 38 mm, measured at 32.2 mm — nearly 6 mm less shoe under the ball of the foot than the spec sheet claims. For a runner that is a footnote. For someone buying the Bondi because of forefoot pain, it is close to half the cushioning difference they were shopping for.

2. The Ghost’s spec sheet survives measurement

Every published figure on the Ghost 17 lands within roughly half a millimetre of the laboratory measurement. Heel, forefoot, drop, weight — all of it. That is unusual enough in this industry to be worth saying plainly: when Brooks tells you what the shoe is, you can plan around it. If you are working with a podiatrist or physiotherapist who has asked you to stay within a particular drop range, that reliability is worth more than any foam technology.

3. The Bondi’s cushioning comes from height, not softness

This is the finding that surprises people. On the Asker C scale, a higher number means a firmer midsole. The Bondi came in at 43.0; the Ghost at 36.2. The shoe marketed as maximally cushioned is running the firmer foam of the two.

That is not a contradiction — it is how Hoka designed the Bondi. The Bondi gets its cushioning from a very tall stack of moderately firm foam, not from a soft one. Firm-and-tall behaves differently underfoot from soft-and-low: it is more stable at height, it holds its shape longer over the life of the shoe, and it feels less plush on the first step than the marketing implies. People who try a Bondi expecting a pillow and describe it as “firmer than I expected” are reading the foam correctly.

That firmness belongs to the Bondi, not to the brand. Across the eight HOKA and seven Brooks models we review that the lab has measured, the HOKAs do stand taller — a median heel stack of 39.4 mm against 37.2 — but their midsoles are softer, with a median of 35.0 Asker C against 39.7, and the Bondi 9, at 43.0, is the firmest of the eight HOKAs.

Which brand suits which foot

Reach for Hoka if

• Your big toe joint is stiff or painful. Hallux rigidus and hallux limitus respond to a rocker because the shoe rolls you forward instead of demanding that the joint bend. This is the single strongest clinical reason to choose Hoka.
• You have forefoot pain and want height under the metatarsals — though check the measured forefoot figure for the specific model, not the published one.
• You are on hard floors all day and want the tallest comfortable platform you can get. See our guide to the best shoes for standing all day.
• You need a wide toe box in a cushioned shoe. The Bondi measured 72.5 mm at the big toe against the Ghost’s 69.6 mm — a meaningful difference if your toes are crowded.

Reach for Brooks if

• You want the shoe to match its own specification. On the evidence above, that is Brooks.
• A tall midsole has made you feel unstable before. A lower stack keeps your ankle closer to the ground and gives you more proprioceptive feedback.
• You want stability that guides rather than blocks. Brooks’ GuideRails approach limits excess movement at the knee and heel instead of jamming a firm post under the arch, which suits people who find traditional motion control shoes punishing.
• You prefer a higher drop because it is comfortable for you or fits guidance from the clinician managing your Achilles symptoms. Do not choose by drop alone.

Model-for-model equivalents

If you already own one and want the nearest thing from the other brand:

If you wear this Hoka	The Brooks equivalent	What the job is
Bondi	Glycerin	Maximum cushioning, neutral
Clifton	Ghost	Everyday neutral trainer
Arahi	Adrenaline GTS	Light stability for overpronation
Gaviota	Beast / Ariel	Maximum stability and support
Transport	Addiction Walker	Walking and everyday wear

These are functional equivalents, not identical shoes. The Arahi and the Adrenaline both control overpronation, but they do it by different means — the Arahi with a firmer frame built into the midsole, the Adrenaline with rails either side of the heel. If one has failed you, the other is genuinely worth trying rather than a second attempt at the same idea.

Every model where both figures exist

The table above compares one flagship from each brand. This site now holds a lab-measured drop next to the maker’s printed drop for seven HOKA and Brooks shoes, and the pattern in the Bondi and the Ghost holds across all of them.

Shoe	Printed drop	Lab-measured drop	Difference
HOKA Transport 2	5 mm	11.2 mm	+6.2 mm
HOKA Clifton 10	8 mm	12.4 mm	+4.4 mm
HOKA Bondi 9	5 mm	9.1 mm	+4.1 mm
Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24	12 mm	13.5 mm	+1.5 mm
Brooks Ghost 17	10 mm	10.4 mm	+0.4 mm
Brooks Adrenaline GTS 25	10 mm	10.2 mm	+0.2 mm
Brooks Glycerin 23	8 mm	8.2 mm	+0.2 mm

Every HOKA where both numbers exist measures between 4 and 6 millimetres more drop than HOKA prints. Every Brooks lands within 1.5 mm. Part of any gap is method — a lab measures the finished shoe with its insole in place, while a printed figure describes the design — but method alone does not explain why one brand’s gaps are ten times the other’s.

The practical rule is simple. If drop matters to you, because a clinician has asked you to stay within a range or because a lower or higher shoe has bothered you before, choose by the measured figure, never by the printed one. A HOKA printed at 5 mm can be carrying more heel lift than a Brooks printed at 8.

Hoka or Brooks for plantar fasciitis

A shoe comparison does not establish a cure for plantar fasciitis or guarantee that the fascia will stop being irritated between treatments. Heel-counter fit, midfoot construction, a removable insole and the reported heel-to-toe offset are considerations to check on the actual pair; no four-feature rule here proves symptom relief. Plantar-fasciitis care can include stretching and other interventions selected for the individual. If an orthotic is considered, its fit and role in the wider care plan need assessment rather than an automatic choice from a brand comparison.

On the figures this site holds, Brooks gives you more of those features to check. The Ghost 18 has the stiffest heel counter on file, 5 of 5 on the lab’s scale. The Adrenaline GTS 24 has the most measured heel lift of any trainer here, 13.5 mm, and the firmest running midsole, 44.1 Asker C. Brooks confirms in writing that the insole lifts out of the Ghost, the Adrenaline and the Glycerin, and that the Beast GTS 26 and Ghost Max 4 are built to take an orthotic. The full picture is in the Brooks plantar fasciitis guide.

HOKA earns its place when the heel pain is not the only problem. If your heel hurts and your big toe joint is stiff, or the ball of your foot aches as well, the Bondi 9’s rocker and tall, firm platform (41.3 mm at the heel and 43.0 Asker C, both lab-measured) do something no conventional Brooks trainer does: they roll you through the step instead of asking the forefoot to bend. Buy it knowing that its real drop is 9.1 mm, not the printed 5. The HOKA plantar fasciitis guide covers the rest of the range.

If you overpronate as well, the comparison narrows to the stability shoes: the Adrenaline GTS against the Arahi 8 for light correction, and the Beast GTS 26 against the Gaviota 6 for maximum support. Brooks holds the heel with rails on either side; HOKA builds a firmer frame into the midsole. If one approach has failed you, try the other rather than another version of the same idea.

For ball-of-foot pain and a stiff big toe

Here the comparison tips toward HOKA, and the reason is geometry rather than softness. A rocker sole lets the shoe roll over the metatarsal heads and the big toe joint instead of bending at them, which is what a painful forefoot or a joint with arthritis needs. The Bondi 9 carries a lab-measured 32.2 mm under the forefoot against the Ghost 17’s 25.8 mm — a real difference, even though it is nearly 6 mm short of the 38 mm HOKA prints.

Brooks’ answer is the Ghost Max 4: a rocker and a maximal platform on a broad base, which Brooks states will accommodate an orthotic. Its 6 mm drop and 39 mm heel come from a retailer listing, because Brooks publishes neither. If you want the HOKA shape without leaving Brooks, it is the shoe to try. For the full treatment of each condition, see shoes for ball-of-foot pain and shoes for hallux rigidus.

For walking and standing all day

Both brands make a shoe that is not for running, and they are built on opposite ideas. The HOKA Transport 2 is a commuter shoe: it looks like everyday footwear, comes in medium and wide, measures 70.2 mm across at the big toe, and carries a lab-measured 11.2 mm of drop against the 5 mm HOKA prints. The Brooks Addiction Walker 2 is a motion-control walking shoe in leather: the firmest midsole on file at 48.7 Asker C, the most torsionally rigid shoe on file at 5 of 5, a lab-measured 12.2 mm of drop, and widths from 2A to 2E in women’s and B to 4E in men’s. Its heel counter scored only 3 of 5, softer than you would expect from the label.

Choose the Addiction Walker 2 if your arch collapses by the end of a shift, or you need a width beyond what HOKA offers. Choose the Transport 2 if you want something that passes for an ordinary shoe and your feet are mainly tired rather than painful. For a slippery work floor, HOKA’s leather Bondi SR is the slip-resistant option. The standing-all-day guide compares other brands.

Width, toe box and fit

Brand reputations for width are mostly out of date. The internal toe box measured at the big toe is the figure that decides whether crowded toes or a drifting big toe will be comfortable, and on the lab’s figures for the shoes on this site it varies more within each brand than between them:

• Widest: HOKA Gaviota 6, 76.7 mm — the roomiest of either brand.
• Above the median: Brooks Glycerin 23, 73.9 mm; Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24, 73.7 mm; HOKA Arahi 8, 73.6 mm; HOKA Clifton 10, 73.1 mm.
• Middle: Brooks Adrenaline GTS 25, 72.8 mm; HOKA Bondi 9, 72.5 mm.
• Narrowest: HOKA Clifton 11, 70.9 mm; Brooks Ghost 18, 70.6 mm; HOKA Transport 2, 70.2 mm; Brooks Ghost 17, 69.6 mm.

Two things stand out. The Ghost family is the narrowest of the Brooks trainers at the big toe in both of its recent versions, so a Ghost wearer with crowded toes should look at the Glycerin rather than a wider Ghost; our Brooks toe box comparison has all seven. And the Clifton 11 measures over 2 mm narrower at the big toe than the Clifton 10, a reminder that a model year can change the fit as much as the foam.

When it comes to width fittings, Brooks offers a narrow on the Ghost and the Adrenaline, which HOKA does not offer, and every Brooks we review goes to 4E in men’s. HOKA’s runners on this site come in regular and wide, and the Clifton, Bondi, Arahi and Gaviota in extra wide too; for how much room each model has inside, see every current HOKA toe box we have a lab figure for. If you need more than either brand makes, see shoes for wide feet.

The current models, paired on the numbers

The equivalents table above names the pairs. Here is what the figures say about each, using the newest versions where this site has them:

• Bondi 9 against Glycerin 23 — both sold as the brand’s maximum cushion, and the most different pair on this list. The Bondi measures 43.0 Asker C, the Glycerin 29.2: the HOKA is firm and tall, the Brooks genuinely soft. Pick the Bondi for stability at height and a forefoot rocker, the Glycerin for a bruised heel pad and a roomier toe box.
• Clifton 11 against Ghost 18 — the everyday neutral trainers, within a few dollars and a third of a millimetre at the toe box of each other. The Ghost 18’s 5-of-5 heel counter is the measured difference; the Clifton’s rocker is the design one.
• Arahi 8 against Adrenaline GTS 25 — light stability by frame or by rails. The Arahi is the roomier at the big toe, 73.6 mm against 72.8; the Adrenaline GTS 25 has the more complete lab profile, with a 10.2 mm measured drop and a soft 34.5 Asker C midsole.
• Gaviota 6 against Beast GTS 26 — maximum support. The Gaviota has the widest toe box of either brand; the Beast has the 4E fitting, Brooks’ written statement that it takes an orthotic, and the APMA Seal of Acceptance.
• Transport 2 against Addiction Walker 2 — everyday wear against a motion-control walker, covered in the walking section above.
• Bondi 9 against Ghost Max 4 — the pairing the table leaves out, and the one to try if you like the HOKA shape but want to stay with Brooks.

What a rocker sole does, and who should be careful with one

The single biggest design difference between these brands is the rocker: a sole curved upward at the toe and often at the heel, so the shoe rolls through the step rather than bending. HOKA builds some rocker into nearly every model; Brooks builds it into the Ghost Max and keeps its other trainers closer to a conventional flex.

A rocker earns its place in three situations. A big toe joint stiffened by arthritis does not have to bend as far, because the shoe does the rolling. Pressure under the metatarsal heads falls, which is why rocker soles are a standard tool for forefoot pain and for protecting the forefoot in diabetes. And an ankle that has lost movement, from arthritis or a fusion, gets some of its motion back from the shoe.

It is not free. A pronounced rocker on a tall stack changes how you walk and reduces how much of the ground you feel. Anyone with a balance problem, numb feet or repeated ankle sprains should try one on a hard floor in the shop before buying, and step into it gradually rather than wearing it for a full day straight away. If a tall rocker has made you feel unsteady before, a lower conventional shoe such as the Ghost 18 is the safer choice, whatever the reviews say.

When to replace either brand

Neither company publishes a lifespan for its shoes, so any mileage you are quoted is an estimate. The signs are the same for both: creases that stay in the side of the midsole, a heel counter that folds when you squeeze it, an outsole worn through to the foam, and, most reliably, the return of symptoms that new shoes had settled.

The lab figures add one useful point. Foam softens with use, so a shoe that starts firm has further to go before it stops supporting you than one that starts soft. On the figures here, the Bondi 9 at 43.0 Asker C and the Adrenaline GTS 24 at 44.1 begin with more in reserve than the Glycerin 23 at 29.2. That is not a reason to choose a firm shoe you do not like; it is a reason to check a soft one sooner.

Skip both if

Every honest comparison has to name the people it does not serve.

• You have significant forefoot pain and are buying the Bondi on its published forefoot stack. The measured figure is almost 6 mm lower. Look at the numbers on the specific pair, or choose on measured data rather than the box.
• You have a bunion, hammertoe or neuroma and are buying a standard-width Ghost. At 69.6 mm across the big toe it is noticeably tapered. Go up a width, or read our wide toe box guide first.
• You want genuine low-drop geometry. Neither of these two delivers it once measured.

Questions people ask about Hoka and Brooks

Is Hoka or Brooks better for plantar fasciitis?

For heel pain on its own, Brooks gives you more measured features to check: the stiffest heel counter on file in the Ghost 18, the most measured heel lift in the Adrenaline GTS 24, and insoles Brooks confirms will lift out for an orthotic. Choose HOKA, usually the Bondi 9, when the heel pain comes with a stiff big toe or a painful forefoot, because the rocker helps there. Neither brand treats the condition; stretching and, where needed, an orthotic do.

Do podiatrists recommend Hoka or Brooks?

Both, for different feet. In clinic the choice usually follows the problem: a rocker for forefoot and big-toe pain, a firm heel counter and an orthotic-friendly insole for heel pain and a collapsing arch. The Brooks Beast GTS 26 and its women’s version, the Ariel GTS 26, are named on the APMA’s list of Brooks shoes with its Seal of Acceptance. A brand is never the prescription; the shoe’s geometry is.

Is the Brooks Ghost Max like a Hoka?

It is the closest Brooks gets: a rocker, a maximal platform and a broad base, with a low 6 mm drop by a retailer’s figure. Brooks publishes no stack heights for it, so it cannot yet be compared with the Bondi 9 on measured numbers.

Which is better for wide feet, Hoka or Brooks?

Neither brand wins outright. The roomiest toe box of either is HOKA’s Gaviota 6 at 76.7 mm, but Brooks offers the wider range of fittings, with 4E in men’s on the Beast, Ghost Max and Addiction Walker and a narrow option on its core trainers. Choose the model by its measured toe box, then the fitting by your width.

Is Hoka or Brooks better for walking?

For tired feet that mainly need comfort, the HOKA Transport 2 or any cushioned trainer from either brand will do. For an arch that collapses or a foot that needs control over a long day, the Brooks Addiction Walker 2 is the more supportive shoe on the figures, and it comes in leather and in four widths.

Why does my HOKA feel firmer than I expected?

Because it is. The Bondi 9 measures 43.0 on the Asker C scale, firmer than the Brooks Ghost 17 at 36.2 and far firmer than the Glycerin 23 at 29.2. HOKA’s cushioning comes from the height of the stack, not the softness of the foam.

What is the best HOKA for plantar fasciitis?

The Bondi 9 for most people: the tallest heel in the line, a rocker, a wide toe box and three widths, with a real drop of 9.1 mm by lab measurement rather than the 5 mm printed. Add the Arahi 8 if you overpronate, and the Gaviota 6 if you need the most support HOKA makes. The HOKA plantar fasciitis guide goes model by model.

Are Brooks Glycerin good for plantar fasciitis?

The Glycerin 23 is the softest shoe on file at 29.2 Asker C and one of the roomiest at the big toe, which feels excellent under a bruised heel pad. But soft foam lets the arch sink further, and its 8.2 mm is the lowest measured drop of the Brooks trainers on file, so it is not the first Brooks for a fascia that is already under tension. It suits fat pad pain better than plantar fasciitis.

Hoka or Brooks for high arches?

A high, rigid arch needs cushioning and a heel that is held, not motion control, which pushes a foot that already rolls outward further onto its outer edge. From Brooks, the Ghost 18 with its 5-of-5 heel counter; from HOKA, the Bondi 9 for its tall, stable platform. The supination guide covers other brands.

Are Brooks Anthem good for plantar fasciitis?

We have no review of the Anthem and no lab figures for its heel, so we cannot compare it on the numbers. It is Brooks’ entry-price road shoe. If cost is the deciding factor, the Adrenaline GTS 24 is being cleared at a lower price and has the measured heel lift and firm midsole a sore heel wants.

How we would settle it

Every figure above is either the manufacturer’s or an independent laboratory’s. None of it is ours yet. When these pairs come through our protocol they are weighed on our scale, measured with calipers at the widest point of the toe box and at the big toe, given an Orthotic Volume Rating for whether a custom device fits once the stock insole is out, and worn on clinic floors and pavement before anything is scored. Until then, this page tells you what the numbers say and who published them — nothing more.

The models we have analysed from each brand

These are the models already in our review library that meet the criteria above. None of them has completed the full measurement protocol yet, so none carries a score or the Podiatrist Tested seal — each links to its published specification analysis, where every figure is attributed to the brand that published it. How we test.

Disclosure: the Amazon links in this section are paid links. If you buy through one, Amazon pays us a commission at no extra cost to you. Commissions never influence which shoes appear here, their order, a score or the seal — see our independence policy.

Correction — 29 September 2026: We removed contradictory claims that lower or higher shoe drop necessarily reduces Achilles loading. Laboratory findings do not establish which of these shoe models is clinically better for an individual. These edits do not represent new product testing.

Sourced, not guessed

Recently reviewed

Individual shoe pages state their evidence tier, published measurements and who should skip them.

Saucony

Saucony Endorphin Speed 5

Spec Analysis

Light plated neutral trainer. Saucony publishes both stack heights and they match its 8 mm drop — not yet tested.

$175Not scoredRegular / Wide

HOKA

HOKA Mach 6

Spec Analysis

Lower, firmer neutral HOKA. HOKA publishes a 5 mm drop and neither stack height — not yet tested.

Not scored

ASICS

ASICS Novablast 5

Spec Analysis

Bouncy high-stack neutral. ASICS publishes an 8 mm drop and neither stack height — not yet tested.

Not scoredStandard / Wide / Extra Wide

All reviews

Our funding and evidence policy

We earn affiliate commissions from qualifying purchases. Our policy is to assess published evidence and fit needs rather than rank products by commission rate. Current reviews are specification analyses; see our method for their limits.

Browse the reviewsHow we assess shoes